________________
Rasa-niṣpatti-vicāra in Abhinavagupta
1529
if both 'utpatti' and 'abhivyakti' are rejected at a time, then rasa will be beyond any apprehension, i.e. it will be "a-prameya." Thus rasa will be a non-entity, i.e. it will be "a-siddha", for there is no third option seen in this case. : "nispädanábhivyaktidvayána-bhyupagame ca nityo vásan vā rasa, iti na tṛtīyā gatiḥ syāt." (pp. 11, Gnoli, ibid).
"Besides, if we do not admit that rasa is produced or manifested, we shall be forced to conclude that it is either eternal or non-existent : no third possibility exists." (Tran. Gnoli, pp. 49)
A.bh. further observes: "na ca apratītam vastu asti vyavahāre yogyam. athócyate pratitir asya bhogīkaraṇam, tac ca druty adi, svarūpam. tad astu, tathápi na tavan mātram. yāvanto hi rasās tāvā❞tya eva rasanā❞tmānaḥ pratītayo bhogīkaraṇa-svabhāvāḥ. guṇānām cángangi-vaicitryam anantam kalpyam iti kā tritvena iyattā."- (Gnoli, pp. 11. ibid).
"Again, the existence of an unperceived thing cannot be affirmed. The supporters of Bhaṭṭa Nayaka will perhaps reply that the perception of rasa is just what they call the power of bringing about enjoyment (bhogīkarana)- consisting in the states of fluidity, etc. Very well, then! But it is impossible that it should consist solely in these three states. For there exist just as many forms of perception-whose nature, according to you, lies in this very power of bringing about fruition- . consisting of a relish, as there are kinds of Rasa. Besides, the constituent elements, sattva, etc., can be found set out in an infinite number of different ways: one may predominate at one time and another at another. Thus it is absurd to limit the forms of relish to only three."- (Trans. Gnoli, pp. 49, 50, ibid).
It may be noted that though for the sake of argument A.G. has denounced Bhaṭṭa Nayaka's position that there is neither 'utpatti' nor 'abhivyahti" of rasa, but in fact he himself accepts the extra-ordinariness, a-laukikatva, of rasa which is not to be met with in worldly context. We will see that he will observe, "na dṛṣam" iti bhūṣam etat, na dūṣaṇam." But this alaukikatva, for A.G. is best expressed by the term 'abhivyakti' through "vyañjanā", which covers up both bhāvakatva and bhojakatva of Bhaṭṭa Nayaka, thus avoiding the contingency of what is termed "gaurava-dosa". We will see this in greater details later.
Third point that A. G. finds objectionable in Bhatta Nayaka's thesis is as noted above the three states of consciousness, vig. fluidity (druti), enlargement (vistara) and expansion (vikāsa). We have noted above that A.G. observes that there can be as many states as are rasas and the proportion in the combination of sattva, rajas
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
